I really dont think the Whopper comparison is a good one because the change
they made was reasonable and at least more consistent with my understanding
of  the english language as used here with us having distinct difference
between what is a sandwich and what is a burger.  The Whopper comment does
highlight that the differences in the way in which we all use english is a
significant failing of the english wikipedia to address.

We also have many editors who are paid to edit content on wikipedia within
their role for a number of organisations not only do we condone it but we
actively encourage such editors.  I have trouble labelling all corporate
editors as dishonest in their work didnt we once assume good faith until we
had evidence to the contrary. What makes a glam editor more worthy of that
assumption, or any other random editor?  Paid editors have the ability to
update content regularly and provide additional access to information,
images and media that can enhance the encyclopaedic content. I'm sure
nobody would complain if a paid editor put the original 1800's recipe for
coke or 1980's recipe for new coke on wiki source.

What is being argued against isnt paid editting but rather just the
dishonest representation of a subject on wikipedia for a fee by persons who
believe they have the skills to avoid detection while manipulating the
content.    Paid editors who endeavour to act in good faith should be
engaged with not beaten about with the same stick we use for dishonest
editors who charge a fee.  It actually be more effective for WMF to find a
way engage a group of trusted, experienced editors to be available to
address corporate requests for a fee and take the market away from the
dishonest third party brokers of content.



On 14 April 2017 at 15:39, Natacha Rault <n.ra...@me.com> wrote:

> Hi there, I agree that we should take action and make it real hard for any
> corporation financially to achieve this result.
>
> Legal action is one thing, but the first thing to be done is to ensure
> that all affairs of the type are detected and publicly outed, on the very
> articles if there is large media coverage. I would be in favor of a banner
> over the article stating the article has been targeted for promotional
> purposes by the company.
>
> Maybe we should start a whole independent wikipedia project proposing a «
> conflict of interest rating » just as wikirating does it for financial
> markets.
>
> James, I dont believe this can be done at chapter level (at the current
> state of things) : it must be addressed by the WMF and the communities.
>
> Regards (I’ve just added sourced chunks of the controversies on the French
> wiki by the way, maybe we could ask the community to do it in every
> language?)
>
> Nattes à chat
> > Le 14 avr. 2017 à 07:49, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > With respect to Pine's request for more legal support to help deal with
> > undisclosed paid editing issues, to that I strongly agree.
> >
> > To better address these concerns we need the WMF, communities, and
> > affiliate organizations to collaborate. It is a difficult problem to
> > address.
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:09 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I tend to think along James' lines more than Risker's.
> >>
> >> Responding to Risker:
> >>
> >> It seems to me that the key point that you're missing is that Burger
> King
> >> altered Wikipedia content in order to execute this campaign. This
> wasn't a
> >> simple case of an organization reusing existing Wikipedia content; the
> >> organization appears to have altered Wikipedia content to suit their
> >> purposes regardless of an obvious conflict of interest with Wikipedia's
> >> purpose of being an educational resource rather than an advertising
> >> platform.
> >>
> >> It seems to me that entities of varying sizes -- from a start-up brand
> that
> >> wants to make itself look important by having a Wikipedia article, to
> large
> >> corporations and government officials -- will continue to alter
> Wikipedia
> >> content in ways that are inappropriate and do a disservice to our
> readers
> >> (including advertising, inserting "alternative facts" for medical and
> >> political content, and eliminating negative information that certain
> people
> >> and organizations find inconvenient) and cost editors' and
> administrators'
> >> collective time and attention, until there is a financial price that is
> put
> >> on this kind of behavior that is large enough to deter them. I don't see
> >> why we should stand idly by as our products' quality and trustworthiness
> >> are degraded and our resources are diverted. I'm hoping that WMF's
> >> enforcement actions in this domain would more than pay for themselves
> >> through financial penalties that WMF extracts from the wrongdoers.
> >>
> >> Pine
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James Heilman
> > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> >
> > The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to